Although there are many places and ways that provide individuals with the opportunity to support a candidate, a cause, an issue or a charity, we are still faced with a situation where the vast majority feels both disconnected from their community and government, and utterly impotent to compete against “the big guys”. This perception affects society in various aspects, including, but not limited to: reduces in voter turnout and increased feelings of apathy that may lead to_frustration, which results in bad government. There is a dominance of large money in our political system that is frustrating to many individuals who feel that their individual contributions do not make a difference. Also, due to transaction costs, it is ultimately not profitable to solicit or receive the small donations that the average person is able to contribute. This leads to a disconnect between public affairs and the individual opinion because the general public feels that the amount of money they are able to contribute will impact how much weight their opinion will carry. Furthermore, the amount of legalities and “red tape” that go into contributing to a political cause can discourage an individual who would be an active donor otherwise.
There are a number of places one can go to support a campaign or minor charity as well as many systems that use escrow accounts to transfer money online as illustrated in the following relevant patents.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,898,575 issued to Mull on May 24, 2005 is a system and method for online charitable donations between donors and recipients. While it acts as a go-between for donors and recipients, it does not provide the incentive other than goodwill. Unlike the present invention, there is no source of motivation.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,223,169 issued to Mori et al. on Apr. 24, 2001 is an electronic processing system for transferring a monetary value between and payer and a receiver. However, unlike the present invention this system contains neither an aggregative nor a motivational component.
Various Web sites that engage in this relevant subject matter also do not match the unique aspects of the present invention. For example, SNOCAP.COM focuses on small transactions in conjunction with individual artistic rights and music connections. Thus, SNOCAP.COM is vastly different from the present invention in terms of the aggregative and motivational component. This also means that SNOCAP.COM does not employ such additional items as publishing and localizing donations based on geographical locations. This includes CHARITYNAVIGATOR.ORG and other like Web sites.
Unlike the present invention, none of these endeavors facilitate the unified accounting and reporting practices as the present invention, particularly in the not-for-profit area. Moreover, these Web sites differ from the present invention in that their Web sites are owned by the same non-profit organization where donation, unified accounting mechanisms and reporting are not possible. Other Web sites with buttons, meanwhile, merely link back to a charity's own site. Political opinion Web sites also do offer some networking opportunities for their users but only the present invention conceives to offer networking opportunities specifically aligned with various geographically-based jurisdictions such as electoral districts in a non-partisan and transparent manner. In addition, only the present invention combines this aspect with its other described attributes.
It also should be noted that the present invention solves a fundamental problem relating to the donation process. For example, most political candidates utilize Web sites to solicit donations. In addition to Web sites, many political organizations also solicit donations. However, these political candidates and organizations must act, solicit and report all donations within the confines of jurisdictional election requirements. This is why nearly every online donation solicitation attempts to guide potential donors to provide $10 at a minimum on up to the maximum legal amount permitted to be donated. The reality is that it would be more costly for a political candidate to cover the administration costs of a relatively tiny donation of, say 50 cents for example. The present invention solves this problem by maintaining the ability to report all these individual donors within the law while making these small donations worthwhile in terms of administration costs.
Thus there is a need for a “Civic Marketplace”. Although such Marketplace shall provide a space for opinion and information, it must also ensure individuals, that if they contribute financially, their voices will be heard. Reinforcers such as feedback showing individuals how their contributions are making a difference, will assure that individuals feel more connected to the organizations (ie. Charities, political organizations), after they decide to donate.
There is a need for a system that could                1. fulfill reporting requirements for multiple causes with a one-time registration        2. collect the donations that individuals can contribute to a cause/candidate and aggregate them into a large sum that would require only one transaction.        
This would benefit both donor and recipient. The recipient would receive more donations and therefore more money. The various non-profit organizations would have one central site to solicit donations from relevant donors. Take, for example, a neighborhood park that is in dire need of a new swing set. Such a system would allow the park committee to solicit donations from people in the community who have a vested interest in that park. There are huge advantages for small and local charities that can use this vehicle to advertise to local audiences and centralize collection of these donations. The donors to these various organizations would be able to see how their donation contributed to a large sum, have a sense of empowerment, and be encouraged to be active in public affairs. In turn, political candidates then can act accordingly after reviewing the donation information provided through the present invention.